Accountability Effects on Auditors' Performance: Influence of Knowledge, Problem-Solving Ability, and Task Complexity
37 Pages Posted: 28 Jan 1999
Abstract
In this study, we examine three factors that moderate the relation between accountability to a superior and auditor performance: knowledge, problem-solving ability, and task complexity. Specifically, we predict that accountability works best when the requisite knowledge and abilities are matched with the characteristics of the task.
In our study, auditors performed three tasks of varying complexity. In the low complexity task (listing compliance and substantive tests), accountability did not influence performance. As the task became more complex (listing financial statement errors associated with an internal control deviation), accountability improved performance only when knowledge was high. For the most complex task (listing causes associated with a change in ratios), accountability improved performance only when both knowledge and problem-solving ability were high. These results indicate that accountability works best in particular combinations of knowledge, problem-solving ability, and task complexity. Implications of the results and the directions for future research are discussed.
JEL Classification: M49
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation
Do you have negative results from your research you’d like to share?
Recommended Papers
-
Are Auditors' Judgments Sufficiently Regressive?
By Edward J. Joyce and Gary C. Biddle
-
By Joseph F. Brazel, Christopher P. Agoglia, ...
-
Anchoring and Adjustment In Probabilistic Inference in Auditing
By Edward J. Joyce and Gary C. Biddle
-
A Comparative Evaluation of Belief Revision Models in Auditing
By Ganesh Krishnamoorthy, Theodore J. Mock, ...
-
Using Electronic Audit Workpaper Systems in Audit Practice: Task Analysis, Learning, and Resistance
By Jean C. Bedard, Michael Ettredge, ...
-
The Influence of Audit Structure on Auditors' Performance in High and Low Complexity Task Settings
By Iris Stuart and Douglas F. Prawitt
-
The Effect of Stopping Rules on the Evaluation of Audit Evidence